Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GST who wrote (148134)	10/18/2004 10:05:20 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Yes the north vietnamese and the viet cong were just as vietnamese as the south vietnamese govt and supporters. They may have been bad but no one now doubts that it was a civil war when defined broadly (vietnam really one country not two back then). In iraq, no similarity exists. Zarquawi, bin laden, baath remnants, and still functioning saddam security apparatus are there to imprison iraqis much like the taliban imprisoned afgans. To call these folks iraqis is an insult. This does not change the fact that it is a guerilla insurgency and that many iraqis view us as occupiers and want us out. Some even ally themselves with the bad guys viewing the job of getting us out as more important. Its just that very few want them in. Note i left al sadr out as according to NYTimes today over 1000 large weapons have been turned in so far and the govt is extending the time period. I know you think al sadr a bad outcome but he certainly falls within your definition of an iraqi. Mike